Does anyone know if anybody is running a supercharger and turbo with a Dseries?Ive seen it on mustang cobras pushing over 1000hp.
Supercharger and turbo?
2 reading
IHUNTEI2
21 - 40 of 53 Posts
First calm the fuck down.First off, the two of you need to fucking read up on what the fuck your talking about...
You can't compare a JRSC M42 to T3/T4. A stock Eaton M45 is rated for maybe 200 crank hp. Take a turbo rated for the same amount of power and see which produces more power, and most importantly, a better powerband. Sure you can get a >small< turbo and make 180whp on a D16, but you can also make 180whp with a JRSC. But which will be smoother? Which will be more street friendly? Which will be faster?
More importantly, go look at a fucking dyno of a JRSC/M45 on a D16. Is it all low-end and then just dies? FUCK NO! It takes the curve, moves it up maybe 20ft/lbs everywhere, and then adds a bit more in the midrange.
And if your going to compare a Turbo build to a S/C build, make it atleast kinda fucking fair. First dyno is a M90 Supercharger on a B-series engine. Second dyno is a boosted b-series. SC makes more power... Everywhere...
Anyone interested in a 500+ WHP Supercharger Kit? - Honda-Tech
![Image]()
4dr Integra, Built 2.0 LS/VTEC, FR stage 1 kit, 475whp/325tq | Evans Tuning Dyno Database
![Image]()
Now we are talking about a d motor. And the first think i think of when i hear d superchager is JRSC. Which yes will output about 180hp and have a smoother power band then a small turbo. But with bigger turbo your have a higher output in the upper rpm. Also when people use both they normally use the super to load the turbo for higher end power.
but im not going to start a war on this board. You have your opinion on the setups and i have mines
High compression + small turbo = same effect for less money.
Good grief. So many opinions and so little fact.
Everyone has a right to their opinion, however just because something is someones opinion, that does not make it fact.
Fact
A turbo is a supercharger. It is just a supercharger that is driven by an exhaust gas driven turbine.
Fact
Turbos also have parasitic losses to drive them, it's just not so obvious at first glance because you can't see and feel the drive like you can with a belt. The losses come from extra pressure in the chamber on the exhaust stroke acting against the piston on its way up.
Fact
Steady state power at any given rpm can be very different to response rate so it might feel and perform very differently. ie less steady state power but faster response rate feels like more bottom end and gives faster initial acceleration.
Fact
Positive displacement blowers perform and respond VERY differently to turbines or fans or other not positive displacement blowers.
Fact
Although belt driven, centrifugal blowers do not drive like a positive displacement blower. Their output increases exponentially to speed whereas positive displacement blowers tend to increase output directly proportional to speed
Fact
There are at least two other project cars on this board that have roots type Eaton blowers that are not JRSC and are not M45s so the presumption that it is a JRSC and an M45 is well at least very presumptuous.
Fact
As a roots or for that matter a screw type blower or even a piston type compressor (yes it has been done before) are all positive displacement, they have an output that is pretty much directly proportional to rpm over a relatively wide rpm range.
Fact
If a blower is belt or crank or gear driven its speed is directly tied to engine speed. This greatly reduces response time.
Fact
At what engine speeds any of the above perform best depends on a large number of variables and succes depends on best matching all componentsto the required performance.
Everyone has a right to their opinion, however just because something is someones opinion, that does not make it fact.
Fact
A turbo is a supercharger. It is just a supercharger that is driven by an exhaust gas driven turbine.
Fact
Turbos also have parasitic losses to drive them, it's just not so obvious at first glance because you can't see and feel the drive like you can with a belt. The losses come from extra pressure in the chamber on the exhaust stroke acting against the piston on its way up.
Fact
Steady state power at any given rpm can be very different to response rate so it might feel and perform very differently. ie less steady state power but faster response rate feels like more bottom end and gives faster initial acceleration.
Fact
Positive displacement blowers perform and respond VERY differently to turbines or fans or other not positive displacement blowers.
Fact
Although belt driven, centrifugal blowers do not drive like a positive displacement blower. Their output increases exponentially to speed whereas positive displacement blowers tend to increase output directly proportional to speed
Fact
There are at least two other project cars on this board that have roots type Eaton blowers that are not JRSC and are not M45s so the presumption that it is a JRSC and an M45 is well at least very presumptuous.
Fact
As a roots or for that matter a screw type blower or even a piston type compressor (yes it has been done before) are all positive displacement, they have an output that is pretty much directly proportional to rpm over a relatively wide rpm range.
Fact
If a blower is belt or crank or gear driven its speed is directly tied to engine speed. This greatly reduces response time.
Fact
At what engine speeds any of the above perform best depends on a large number of variables and succes depends on best matching all componentsto the required performance.
Joined
·
37 Posts
I never said supercharger loses power but a supercharger has instant power where a turbo lags.TURBO WINS TOPEND ALL DAY AGAINST S/C. So you need to read up on wtf your talking about.Think before u speak. NOOB!First off, the two of you need to fucking read up on what the fuck your talking about...
You can't compare a JRSC M42 to T3/T4. A stock Eaton M45 is rated for maybe 200 crank hp. Take a turbo rated for the same amount of power and see which produces more power, and most importantly, a better powerband. Sure you can get a >small< turbo and make 180whp on a D16, but you can also make 180whp with a JRSC. But which will be smoother? Which will be more street friendly? Which will be faster?
More importantly, go look at a fucking dyno of a JRSC/M45 on a D16. Is it all low-end and then just dies? FUCK NO! It takes the curve, moves it up maybe 20ft/lbs everywhere, and then adds a bit more in the midrange.
And if your going to compare a Turbo build to a S/C build, make it atleast kinda fucking fair. First dyno is a M90 Supercharger on a B-series engine. Second dyno is a boosted b-series. SC makes more power... Everywhere...
Anyone interested in a 500+ WHP Supercharger Kit? - Honda-Tech
![Image]()
4dr Integra, Built 2.0 LS/VTEC, FR stage 1 kit, 475whp/325tq | Evans Tuning Dyno Database
![Image]()
Fixed.
If you want to make big power with a turbo, you increase the tendency to lag.
They can never quite match a belt driven positive displacement blower for response. Sure with a real good set up they may go close to the point you can't really tell.
Probably not on something as small as a D, but with a well set up roots (A JRSC is a long way from well set up) response is so sharp it can actually have the opposite problem to lag in that the response is so brutal that traction control and gentle part throttle control can be an issue.
Joined
·
5,968 Posts
my gt-17 would start building boost as soon as went wot in any gear and just about any rpm......im sure with a large vortech sentrifical s/c you would experience some "lag on a d16......you would lose a ton of hp just to get it spinning and then you'd have to produce enough bosst pressure to get you motor back to the hp level it was stock.....i could see the use of say a gt1752 coupled with a large vortec.....the turbo would wind up pretty fast spinning the motor quicker to get the s/c to start producing power
so in theroy it could go either way and i think thast was the point trying to be made.....s/c dont "lag" but they rob power to make power and hypethetically lets say it take 25whp to spin the supercharger, it may take 5 psi to make 25whp....so in theory the time it takes to get to 5 psi could be considered "lag time" or the time it take to get you back to 0 hp loss, then you start making additional power
so in theroy it could go either way and i think thast was the point trying to be made.....s/c dont "lag" but they rob power to make power and hypethetically lets say it take 25whp to spin the supercharger, it may take 5 psi to make 25whp....so in theory the time it takes to get to 5 psi could be considered "lag time" or the time it take to get you back to 0 hp loss, then you start making additional power
Why would anyone think of running a Vortec or any other centrifugal with a turbo.
Centrifugals either produce almost no bottom end or no top end as their mass air flow increases as the square of engine speed, ie, double engine speed and they supply 4 times as much air. Quadrupole engine speed and they supply 16 times as much air.
This is in no way a cure for turbo lag.
A well set up roots blower will virtually instantly supply full boost off idle, like within the time it takes you to mash the pedal to the floor. That offsets the power delay of the turbo spool time to some extent but also decreases spool time as the extra air flow makes more hot exhaust so the turbo spools even faster.
Centrifugals either produce almost no bottom end or no top end as their mass air flow increases as the square of engine speed, ie, double engine speed and they supply 4 times as much air. Quadrupole engine speed and they supply 16 times as much air.
This is in no way a cure for turbo lag.
A well set up roots blower will virtually instantly supply full boost off idle, like within the time it takes you to mash the pedal to the floor. That offsets the power delay of the turbo spool time to some extent but also decreases spool time as the extra air flow makes more hot exhaust so the turbo spools even faster.
Joined
·
5,968 Posts
I was just backing the point that was made that techiqually you could setup a small turbo with almost no lag time to get moving utalizing a large s/c for the top end, instead of the generalization that twin charged mean blow for bottom end and turbo for the top end.....that in theory it could actually work both ways...which when someone made a comment early for saying such a thing he was called stupid.....because the name caller cantt see past a m45 arguably the most pathedic supercharger ever....if the d-series kit came with the larger m6x I think we would see a lot more s/c builds and a lot more love from the d-series community
Joined
·
6,481 Posts
It also needs to be said that there is a difference between "lag" and simply being below the boost threshold.
Lag is the delay in boost you get when you mash the throttle at high RPM, with modern turbochargers there is almost zero noticeable lag with a well sized turbo.
This isnt to be confused with the lag that you get when going WOT at low RPM, here the engine is not moving enough gas to spool the turbo, so youre accelerating while the turbo spools until you get to where the engine starts flowing enough. This lag doesnt matter in the least because when racing you will never be at low RPM (or you'll only be there once).
As for this whole "superchargers make low, turbos high" business; that is generalizing, and generalizing is useless. The old two lobe roots are not a good example, they will probably never compare to a turbo in any respect. A turbo will make more power across the entire RPM range except for maybe below 2k rpm (i.e. useless)
Now on the other hand modern 4 lobe roots blowers and twin screw blowers are another story. They have both proven themselves of being pretty comparable to modern turbocharging.
I still believe that turbocharging will have the most potential simply due to the lower parasitic loss, but when talking about street cars and non-purpose-built drag cars a modern supercharger is very effective.
Moral of the story:
Dont judge all superchargers by those god awful Jackson Racing kits that have plagued Hondas and Mazdas for 20 years.
Lag is the delay in boost you get when you mash the throttle at high RPM, with modern turbochargers there is almost zero noticeable lag with a well sized turbo.
This isnt to be confused with the lag that you get when going WOT at low RPM, here the engine is not moving enough gas to spool the turbo, so youre accelerating while the turbo spools until you get to where the engine starts flowing enough. This lag doesnt matter in the least because when racing you will never be at low RPM (or you'll only be there once).
As for this whole "superchargers make low, turbos high" business; that is generalizing, and generalizing is useless. The old two lobe roots are not a good example, they will probably never compare to a turbo in any respect. A turbo will make more power across the entire RPM range except for maybe below 2k rpm (i.e. useless)
Now on the other hand modern 4 lobe roots blowers and twin screw blowers are another story. They have both proven themselves of being pretty comparable to modern turbocharging.
I still believe that turbocharging will have the most potential simply due to the lower parasitic loss, but when talking about street cars and non-purpose-built drag cars a modern supercharger is very effective.
Moral of the story:
Dont judge all superchargers by those god awful Jackson Racing kits that have plagued Hondas and Mazdas for 20 years.
Yeap, build a kit for your d-series with a SC14 (84cid) w/ A/C style clutch from a Previa and have all the fun ya need for less than $500.
Joined
·
777 Posts
Thanks for bringing that up, seems like there's many people mixing lag and boost treshold :bigok:
And yeah, a turbo can never have the same responce as a supercharger. Well, maybe unless you have some crazy WRC anti-lag stuff under the hood
My S/C setup pumps about 5psi around 2000rpm and the thrust is very noticeable (very fun) and not useless. My throttle position is maybe no more than 20%. I have no idea how much torque or HP I'm putting down at that point but I get off the line in a hurry without stomping to WOT. Maybe I even get better gas mileage because of the blower but who knows?
I do agree with your morals though.
Carl
A roots blower will never give a fuel economy gain as you have to drive the blower even at cruise.
A roots blower will never give a fuel economy gain as you have to drive the blower even at cruise.
FT
the difference between lag and boost threshold seems to be one of the least understood phenonymon here.
To test, you hold the engine at WOT at low revs, say 1000, 2000, 3000 and 4000 rpm and note or better still datalog the boost vs time. The boost will take time to build and will not reach full boost no matter how long until you test at an rpm over the threshold.
A roots blower has no threshold and will build full boost at idle if held there under load at WOT.
the difference between lag and boost threshold seems to be one of the least understood phenonymon here.
To test, you hold the engine at WOT at low revs, say 1000, 2000, 3000 and 4000 rpm and note or better still datalog the boost vs time. The boost will take time to build and will not reach full boost no matter how long until you test at an rpm over the threshold.
A roots blower has no threshold and will build full boost at idle if held there under load at WOT.
Never saw how a roots will make full boost at idle. Thought it was linear. Say 2psi at idle and then 4 at 3000rpm and 6 at 5000rpm and so on.
if you want to get anal, you have from when you mash the gas to when the bypass closes until you see power from the roots.
if you want to get anal, you have from when you mash the gas to when the bypass closes until you see power from the roots.
21 - 40 of 53 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
